Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

" The tenant did not give the vacant possession to the landlord/respondent after passing of the ejectment order dated 24.12.2008 and it is pertinent to mention that the respondent/landlord filed an execution petition no.35 of 18.7.2009 for execution of the decree passed by the Ld.Rent Controller on 24.12.2008. Perusal of the file shows that warrants of possession against the property of the JD was issued for 7.11.2009, vide order dated 18.7.2009 passed by Ld.CJJD Jagraon because no stay order had been received from this Court against the judgment and decree dated 24.12.2008. The warrants of possession was executed by the bailiff of the court as per the provisions of law and the report of the bailiff shows that Arun Kumar son of the applicant had taken the custody of the articles and goods kept in the shops and had thereafter given the vacant possession of the shops to the landlord, in the presence of the witnesses. It cannot therefore be said that the possession of the shops was forcibly taken from the tenant. The time period of two months as per the judgment dated 29.7.2009 passed by this Court, for giving the possession of the tenanted premises to the landlord cannot be construed as a stay order in favour of the tenant, moreso, when the landlord had already filed the execution petition on 18.7.2009 after passing of the ejectment order dated 24.12.2008 by the Ld.Rent Controller, Jagraon."